A letter of clarification from the authors of “trophy fishing for species threatened with extinction”

A rejoinder to our recent paper suggests that there has been confusion over our central point. The 85 IUCN Red List Threatened species that the International Game Fish Association issues world records became threatened due to commercial overfishing, not recreational. However, given that they are threatened now, we have concerns about trophy fishing for them, at least in the current form that precludes catch and release. Additionally, while the IGFA claims that an insignificantly low number of record applications for these species have been submitted, many more anglers attempt to catch a large fish than end up submitting record applications. We are grateful for the opportunity to discuss this important issue. & 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Based on a rejoinder [1] to our recent paper “Trophy fishing for species threatened with extinction: a way forward building on a history of conservation” [2] from International Game Fish Association (IGFA) conservation director Jason Schratwieser we believe that there may have been some confusion over the central point of our paper. It is the goal of this letter to provide clarity and propose a collaborative means of addressing the current data limitations and practical aspects of ensuring the conservation of threatened fishes. We acknowledge the points raised by Schratwieser [1] and are in agreement with his assertion that commercial fishing is without a doubt a much larger threat for most fish species than recreational fishing and we never claimed otherwise. Indeed, the cause of the Threatened status of the 85 species with IGFA records is almost certainly due to commercial overexploitation. As we stated in our original paper [2], 81 of the 85 species with IGFA records listed as Threatened by the IUCN Red List have a current or historical commercial fishery associated with them. However, it does not matter how and when these fishes became Threatened, it only matters that they are Threatened now. It is well established in a variety of fish species that the largest individuals are the most fecund [3] and also have the highest reproductive potential [4], resulting in more offspring and improved offspring health and survival. Our paper's central point was that since trophy fishing targets the largest individuals of a species, removal of a few large individuals from a population can have a disproportionate impact relative to removing the same number of smaller fish (i.e. removing a few bigger fish is not equivalent in terms of population dynamics to removing the same number of smaller fish). Therefore, conservation of the largest individuals is of particular importance, as the potential for population recovery and resilience of these Threatened species may be worsened or hindered if, in addition to commercial fishing pressure, the largest individuals from a population are removed. We do not believe, nor did we claim, that trophy fishing or recreational fishing in general has a disproportionate effect on fish populations relative to commercial fishing, which is in agreement with Schratwieser [1]. Over the past 20 years there have been relatively few world record applications submitted to the IGFA for the 85 species of IUCN Red List Threatened fish we identified in our paper [1]. However, the impact of trophy fishing cannot be measured solely by the number of record applications, as many (admittedly an unquantifiable number) more anglers land large fish with the goal of obtaining a prestigious IGFA all-tackle world record than succeed in obtaining one and thus reporting it. This results in higher fishing pressure on large fish than what would be reflected by the actual number of all-tackle record applications [5].